|
on Knowledge Management and Knowledge Economy |
|
Issue of 2014‒12‒24
eleven papers chosen by Laura Ştefănescu Centrul European de Studii Manageriale în Administrarea Afacerilor |
| By: | Beck, Mathias; Lopes-Bento, Cindy; Schenker-Wicki, Andrea |
| Abstract: | This study investigates the efficacy of public R&D support. Compared to most existing studies, we do not stop at substitution effects or general innovation outcome measures, but we are interested in knowing where the policy effect is highest: on innovation close to the market (i.e. incremental innovation) or on innovation that is still far from the market and hence more risky and radical. Using firm level data from the period 1999 to 2011, we find that the policy hits where the market failure is highest, that is, for radical innovation. Taking into account that the Swiss funding agency encourages collaboration, we find no evidence that the impact of the policy is positively effected by various R&D collaboration patterns. |
| Keywords: | R&D subsidies,collaborative innovation,diversity,innovation performance,radical innovation,incremental innovation,policy evaluation,treatment effects |
| JEL: | C14 C30 H23 O31 O38 |
| Date: | 2014 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:zewdip:14106&r=knm |
| By: | Suelene Mascarini |
| Abstract: | This paper aims to examine empirically, through the application of the Knowledge Production Function, how the innovation in micro-region of São Paulo can be affected for some territorial factors. In the literature, and assumed here, the innovative results, measured by patents, are linked to the quantity and quality of innovative inputs and characteristics of the regions that are configured as an input. In this sense, stands the importance of positive externalities that are generated by the spatial concentration of producers and support institutions that are able to contribute to the efforts of innovative firms. In addition, this paper emphasizes the role of local production structures in the regions of São Paulo, since both the regional diversification and regional specialization are mentioned as important factors in the innovation process. The main results suggested that although the level of R&D investments were important for generating local innovation, ie, the generation of local patents, this relationship does not occur clearly in the regions of São Paulo. In addition, local productive structure or density linkages of firms that interacts are certainly important factors and compensatory for innovation process. |
| Keywords: | Geography and Innovation; Patents; Knowledge Production Function. |
| JEL: | O31 R12 R15 |
| Date: | 2014–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa14p885&r=knm |
| By: | Igone Porto; Jose Ramón Otegi |
| Abstract: | A review of the types of Innovation System identified in the literature points to different models. Besides the very well-known National, Regional, Local, sectorial, and technological innovation systems, combinations of the previous can be identified, proposing sub-models such as National Open Innovation Systems, Regional Open Innovation System, as well as Regional Sectorial Innovation System. Innovation systems are generally formed by 3 subsystems: Productive, Knowledge and Institutional. The interaction among the actors embedded in these subsystems fosters the development of cooperative and innovative attitudes. The literature settles differences between innovation systems disposing, in situ, policy making players or those being supported by collaborations with supra-territorial institutions. In this case, institutional subsystems are viewed as common regional values and culture promoters and diffusers. Another point is the openness of the innovation systems. Some authors consider this is already included in the IS concept while others reinforce the idea of the need of aperture. The previously mentioned types of Innovation System help explain the performance of different kind of regions. But, what happens in micro-regions that require sectorial, market, technological and geographical openness? What happens if the analyzed territory is sectorially specialized but does not have final clients, universities, research centers or policy makers? Would in that case be possible to consider an innovation system in the region? In order to contrast the ROSIS ?Regional Open Sectorial Innovation System-, a qualitative interview is performed with inner players of a micro-region (productive firms, knowledge actors and socio-political institutions). The found openness is not only productive, but also technological, sectorial and market-oriented one. Apart from inner players, external ones are also interviewed (regional policy researchers, policy makers, etc.) to academically validate the ROSIS model. Combining external and internal views of the region, the existence of the ROSIS can be analyzed from a policy sight. The scope of this research is the conceptualization and modeling of the ROSIS. This proposed Innovation System subtype is tested in a county located in the Basque Country (Spain) which counts with a strong productive specialization in the metal industry. The result of the analysis is the modeling of a multilevel IS considering the productive, sectorial, market, and technological openness to outside players, but also inner openness cooperation with all the existing players of the region, in order to consider all the knowledge diffusion chances. |
| Keywords: | Innovation System; Sector; Opennes |
| JEL: | L14 O18 O31 O32 R58 |
| Date: | 2014–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa14p389&r=knm |
| By: | Mirko Titze; Matthias Brachert |
| Abstract: | The EU Framework Programme (FP) belongs to the most important instruments promoting transnational collaborative R&D projects in Europe. Its main objective is to initiate cross-border complementarities in order to exploit knowledge resources and to conduct large scale research. Within the EU FPs the applicants are free to choose partners from all over Europe. The key question of our paper is: Which determinants affect the emergence of intra- and interregional collaborations within EU Framework Programmes? One might assume that geographical factors do not matter since trade barriers have been eliminated in the Single European Market. Though, there is a controversial debate on the importance of geographical proximity for the exchange of knowledge. Our paper relies on two theoretical concepts. First, we apply the global cluster networks conception developed by Bathelt and Li (2013). Within this concept it is argued that clustered organizations are more likely to set up collaborative R&D efforts with other similar clustered organizations to keep up with wider industry developments. Conversely, non-cluster organizations are less likely to get integrated cluster destinations. Second, we tie in with the proximity debate discussed in Boschma (2005). According to this concept geographical proximity addresses only one facet. Beyond physical distance other forms of proximity are existent such as social, cognitive, organisational and institutional proximity. It is argued that physical distance is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for interactive learning processes. Though, it may facilitate the other dimensions of proximity. In line with these strands of research we investigate the determinants of the number of cross-region collaborations within EU FPs. The analysis is focused on regional level (NUTS 2). Moreover, we differentiate between two technology fields, biotechnology and aerospace. In doing so, we are capable to capture technology specific characteristics. We apply a spatial interaction modelling framework that bases on a gravity type (Scherngell and Barber 2009). The empirical analysis is carried out using a negative binomial specification. We found evidence that geographical factors still matter ? but technological proximity seems to be more importantly. Moreover, we prove that the mere size in terms of employment and establishments is not necessarily required to establish cross-region collaborations. Also small actors have been chosen as partners in collaborative R&D networks across Europe. |
| JEL: | D85 L14 R12 R15 |
| Date: | 2014–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa14p552&r=knm |
| By: | Roberto Iorio (Department of Economics and Statistics (DISES), University of Salerno); Sandrine Labory (Department of Economics and Management, University of Ferrara); Francesco Rentocchini (University of Valencia) |
| Abstract: | The debate on the entrepreneurial university has raised questions about what motivates academics to engage with industry as well as what forms these knowledge transfer activities can take. This paper analyses the relationship between different forms of motivations, namely mission (following the entrepreneurial mission of the university), learning (access to wider knowledge base for research enhancement) and funding (obtaining financial resources), and the depth and breadth of knowledge transfer activities, measured by the combination of various formal and informal activities and the frequency of interactions. The study is focused on the case of Italian academics but it covers all disciplines. We find that the learning motivation appears to be less important in Italy while mission and funding prevail, probably due to the peculiarities of the Italian industrial system and to the necessity for Italian academics to look for external funding sources for their research. |
| Keywords: | University-industry relations; joint research; collaborative research; commercialisation; entrepreneurial university; motivation |
| JEL: | I23 O32 |
| Date: | 2014–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cme:wpaper:1410&r=knm |
| By: | Hottenrott, Hanna; Lopes-Bento, Cindy; Veugelers, Reinhilde |
| Abstract: | This study investigates the effects of an R&D subsidy scheme on participating firms' net R&D investment. Making use of a specific policy design in Belgium that explicitly distinguishes between research and development grants, we estimate direct and cross-scheme effects on research versus development intensities in recipients firms. We find positive direct effects from research (development) subsidies on net research (development) spending. This direct effect is larger for research grants than for development grants. We also find cross-scheme effects that may arise due to complementarity between research and development activities. Finally, we find that the magnitude of the treatment effects depends on firm size and age and that there is a minimum effective grant size, especially for research projects. The results support the view that public subsidies induce higher additional investment particularly in research where market failures are larger, even when the subsidies are targeting development. |
| Keywords: | R&D,Complementarity,Research Subsidies,Development Subsidies,Innovation Policy |
| JEL: | H23 O31 O38 |
| Date: | 2014 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:zewdip:14107&r=knm |
| By: | Silvia Magri (Bank of Italy) |
| Abstract: | This paper evaluates the causal effect of issuing equities on the probability that a firm will engage in R&D activity. Equity is a preferable source of external finance for innovation than debt. It does not require collateral, does not exacerbate moral hazard problems connected with the substitution of high-risk for low-risk projects, quite common when using debt, and, unlike debt, does not increase the probability of bankruptcy; equity also allows investors to reap the entire benefit of returns on successful innovative projects. The paper focuses on high-tech firms for which asymmetric information problems are more pervasive. Implementing an instrumental variable estimation, we find that issuing equity increases the probability of the firm making R&D expenditure by 30-40 per cent. We detect considerable heterogeneity across firms: the impact of issuing equity is significant only for small, young, and more highly leveraged firms. We also find interesting evidence that issuing equity increases R&D expenditure in relation to sales. |
| Keywords: | R&D, innovation, equity issues, high-tech firms |
| JEL: | G21 G32 O31 O32 |
| Date: | 2014–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:bdi:wptemi:td_978_14&r=knm |
| By: | Massimo Florio (DEAS, Universita' di Milano); Julie Pellegrin (CSIL Centre for Industrial Studies); Emanuela Sirtori (CSIL Centre for Industrial Studies) |
| Abstract: | This paper discusses some conditions under which the Cohesion Policy of the European Union can effectively contribute to enhance R&I in Europe and the extent to which it offers a relevant framework for devising Research & Innovation policies at regional level overcoming possible tensions and maximising potentials for synergy. To do so, the paper mainly relies on an in-depth illustrative case study of an Italian Southern region, Apulia. The paper describes the regional innovation system put in place by the Apulia Region and analyses the value added that can be attributed to such a system as far as innovation and economic development promotion are concerned; on this basis, findings from the case study are generalised in a set of lessons learned with hopefully more general relevance: these are discussed in Section 4. |
| Keywords: | Research intensive clusters; regional innovation systems; mechatronics |
| JEL: | L26 L62 R58 |
| Date: | 2014–11–07 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:mst:wpaper:201403&r=knm |
| By: | Laurent Bergé |
| Abstract: | The question of the determinants of inter-regional knowledge flows has received a growing interest in the recent past. Particularly, the question of the relationship between geography and networks has been debated. Yet, at the inter-regional level, there is no study assessing the effect of networks on the the value of knowledge flows. This may come from the fact that methodological tools assessing network characteristics at the dyadic level are lacking for aggregated networks (such as the network of inter-regional knowledge flows). This paper aims to fill this gap and contribute to the debate on the determinants of knowledge flows. To do so we first define a new measure to assess 'network proximity' at the level of the regional dyad, based on the concept of inter-regional bridging path. Here a bridging path is a path at the micro-level between two regions via a third one. For instance, if an agent from region B has collaborated with an agent from region A and an agent from region C, then there is a bridging path between A and C via B. By using the information at the aggregated level, and assuming a 'random matching process' of the agents at the micro level, we are able to derive a closed form of the total expected number of bridging paths between two given regions. By the concept of triadic closure at the micro-level, the regional pairs having a high number of bridging paths should be more prone to collaborate. We then illustrate the measure theoretically defined by making use of co-publications data from chemistry journals for the period 2001-2005, within the five largest European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the United Kingdom). The studied network is then composed of all the regional pairs among 386 active NUTS3 regions. Using a zero-inflated negative binomial regression model along gravity equations, we then assess the effect of geographical distance, spatial contiguity and national borders. We also assess the effect of 'network proximity' by using the expected number of bridging paths as a proxy. As in previous studies, the effects of the geographical distance or the national borders are negative. But we show that the measure of 'network proximity' has a positive and significant effect. All the more, it also significantly alleviates the impeding effect of national borders on cross-countries collaborations, then suggesting that 'network proximity' is a channel favored for international collaborations. |
| Keywords: | network formation; gravity model; regional closure; aggregated networks; spatial proximity; network proximity; co-publication; research collaboration |
| JEL: | D85 O31 R12 |
| Date: | 2014–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa14p1498&r=knm |
| By: | Zizi Goschin; Georgiana-Gloria Goschin |
| Abstract: | Innovation and competitiveness are important factors for promoting economic growth not only nationally, but regionally as well. In Romania, research, development and innovation could be among the factors that are accountable for the increasing regional disparities, as the territorial distribution of R&D resources is very unbalanced. Romania is currently trying to define a regional strategy for R&D, as well as appropriate policies and priorities for innovation at regional level. In this context we address the issue of the regional intensity of R&D as one of the main determinants of economic growth in Alba county (subregion NUTS 3) in Romania. The Alba subregion can be considered an obvious example of a successful economic transformation since its GDP per capita increased more than 2 times in 10 years, based on a high rate of economic growth. We have analysed the regional intensity of R&D, measured as the share of total research and development expenditures in regional GDP, and have developed an economic growth model that aimed to capture the influence of R&D intensity alongside labour productivity, employment rate, human capital, the share of manufacturing in total economic activity, the extent of private entrepreneurship, and a dummy variable for economic crisis. The results point to a highly significant impact of research and development intensity on the long-run economic development of Alba county, as measured by GDP per capita. This positive effect of R&D on the economic performance in Alba county can be largely attributed to the creation and modernization of the business support infrastructure aimed at developing industrial parks, business incubators, industrial and scientific clusters, technological and logistic platforms, centers for research and transfer of technology, etc. These structures are designed to support business development in areas affected by industrial restructuring, but also economic activities in other areas with development potential in the county, providing favorable conditions for productive SME development, which can further contribute to economic development and job creation in both the underdeveloped and the rising areas in this subregion. |
| Keywords: | economic growth; regional regeneration; Alba county; Romania |
| JEL: | R11 R58 |
| Date: | 2014–11 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa14p584&r=knm |
| By: | Thanh Le (University of Queensland); Cuong Le Van (Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne - Paris School of Economics, IPAG and VCREME) |
| Abstract: | We set up a theoretical framework to discuss the impact of trade liberalization and R&D policies on domestic exporting firms' incentive to innovate and social welfare. In this framework, exporting firms invest in R&D to reduce their production costs and, in return, receive R&D subsidies from the government. While firms target at maximizing their profits, the government aims to maximize the social welfare. We consider different settings of firm competition to explore their strategic behaviors as well as the government's strategic behavior at the policy stage. We find that trade liberalization in the foreign market always increases firms' output sales and social welfare and, in most cases, leads to higher R&D investments and productivity at firms as well as industry level. When firms are independent monopolies in the overseas market, it is optimal for the government not to provide any R&D subsidy. When goods are close substitutes, the social optimum can be achieved as a Nash equilibrium by applying an optimal R&D tax. Trade liberalization induces a higher R&D tax rate to be levied on firms. When firms also conduct business in the home market, it is always optimal for the government to provide firms with a financial support to their R&D activity. While this R&D subsidy is decreasing in the trade cost when firms are independent monopolies, its monotonicity in the trade costs is determined by the convexity of the R&D cost function when firms produce close substitutes. |
| Keywords: | Trade, R&D, subsidies, welfare, process innovation. |
| JEL: | F12 F13 F15 O31 |
| Date: | 2014–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:mse:cesdoc:14079&r=knm |